Would vastly surpass those two IMHO. :-)
Think back a little more than 500 years. Many people still believed the world was flat, the world was only 6000 years old, the Earth was at the center of the universe, etc. However, the time was ripe for not only huge leaps in knowledge, but in exploration as well.
Europe was changing. Natural resources and newly exotic items (especially from the far east such as spices, drugs, silk and china) were all the rage. During this time land based trade routes were established, however, they were long, costly, and difficult. Water routes were attempted including one funded by Ferdinand and Isabella in 1492. It so happened a trade route to the orient was not forthwith, however, an entire new continent was “discovered” (at least to the Europeans).
Here is where it gets interesting. Countries in Europe (mainly Spain, France, and England) looked to this new land, not for colonization, but the abundance of natural resources. Think of what came back from the new world, sugar cane, rubber, gold, silver, furs, timber, cocoa, etc. So not only were these voyages of discovery, but voyages that ultimately lead to trade and wealth.
It took close to 100 years from the voyages of Columbus to the establishments of colonies. Were they able to produce all of the things needed for a society? Not hardly. However, with natural resources being shipped back to the old world and manufactured goods shipped to the new, it turned out to be quite profitable for the nations (and companies -the East India Rubber company comes to mind-) involved.
What I am driving at is that you don’t “need” all of the 4000 years of technological infrastructure to produce a successful colony. If we do establish a lunar colony, the raw material from the lunar regolith may generate enough wealth to make a lunar colony worth the effort.